> If an LLM is often going to be wrong anyway, then being able to try prompts quickly and then iterate on those prompts, could possibly be more valuable than a slow higher quality output.

Asking any model to do things in steps is usually better too, as opposed to feeding it three essays.

▲

ffsm8 5 days ago | parent [-]

I thought the current vibe was doing the former to produce the latter and then use the output as the task plan?

▲

giancarlostoro 5 days ago | parent [-]

I don't know what other people are doing, I mostly use LLMs:

* Scaffolding

* Ask it what's wrong with the code

* Ask it for improvements I could make

* Ask it what the code does (amazing for old code you've never seen)

* Ask it to provide architect level insights into best practices

One area where they all seem to fail is lesser known packages they tend to either reference old functionality that is not there anymore, or never was, they hallucinate. Which is part of why I don't ask it for too much.

Junie did impress me, but it was very slow, so I would love to see a version of Junie using this version of Grok, it might be worthwhile.

▲

ffsm8 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Ask it what's wrong with the code

That's phase 1, ask it to "think deeply" (Claude keyword, only works with the anthropic models) while doing that. Then ask it to make a detailed plan of solving the issue and write that into current-fix.md and ask it to add clearly testable criteria when the issuen is solved.

Now you manually check the criteria wherever they sound plausible, if not - it's analysis failed and its output was worthless.

But if it sounds good, you can then start a new session and ask it to read the-markdown-file and implement the change.

Now you can plausibility check the diff and are likely done

But as the sister comment pointed out, agentic coding really breaks apart with large files like you usually have in brownfield projects.

▲

dingnuts 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> amazing for old code you've never seen

not if you have too much! a few hundred thousand lines of code and you can't ask shit!

plus, you just handed over your company's entire IP to whoever hosts your model

	▲	giancarlostoro 5 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If Apple keeps improving things, you can run the model locally. I'm able to run models on my Macbook with an M4 that I can't even run on my 3080 GPU (mostly due to VRAM constraints) but they run reasonably fast, would the 3080 be faster? Sure, but its also plenty fast to where I'm not sitting there waiting longer than I wait for a cloud model to "reason" and look things up. I think the biggest thing for offline LLMs will have to be consistency for having them search the web with an API like Google's or some other search engines API, maybe Kagi could provide an API for people who self-host LLMs (not necessarily for free, but it would still be useful).
	▲	miohtama 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's a fair trade off for smaller companies where IP or the software is necessary evil, not the main unique value added. It's hard to see what evil would anyone do with crappy legacy code. The IP risks taken may be well worth of productiviry boosts.

▲

miohtama 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I hope in the future tooling and MCP will be better so agents can directly check what functionality exists in the installed package version instead of hallucinations.